This report is focused around Lost and Found data using the intakes and outcomes data received for 2020 and 2021. Its goal is to reflect everything we could learn about L&F from the available data, make sure the numbers we see make sense, and highlight things that would be useful to show but some/all data required for them are missing.
Scroll down or use the table of contents on the left to navigate throughout the document. Most sections contain multiple tabs showing different facets of a data type. Most plots are interactive, meaning they include tooltips and allow hiding and showing parts and zooming in and out. If something went wrong, look for the house icon in the top right corner of each figure to reset.
This section provides an overview of the RTH rate per year divided by species. RTH Rate is calculated as the portion of returned animals that came in as strays out of stray animals. Normally, we also exclude neonate cats, but age group was not easily available in the data supplied.
This table covers all strays and RTHs.
| Species | Year | Strays | RTH_Count | RTH_Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cat | 2020 | 124 | 4 | 0.03 |
| Cat | 2021 | 331 | 10 | 0.03 |
| Dog | 2020 | 221 | 85 | 0.38 |
| Dog | 2021 | 1214 | 432 | 0.36 |
This one only counts animals who came in as strays from the field (using subtype ‘Stray ACO Pick-Up’). These are then split by RTH outcome subtype values with Offsite/Harbor RTO as one category and ‘Shelter RTO’ as all other values.
Data note: does your shelter do return to owner in the field? If so, how is it documented?
| Species | Year | Field_Strays | RTH_Subtype | Field_RTH_Count | RTH_Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cat | 2020 | 8 | Shelter RTH | 1 | 0.12 |
| Cat | 2021 | 48 | Shelter RTH | 2 | 0.04 |
| Dog | 2020 | 57 | Offsite/Harbor RTH | 1 | 0.02 |
| Dog | 2020 | 57 | Shelter RTH | 24 | 0.42 |
| Dog | 2021 | 386 | Offsite/Harbor RTH | 10 | 0.03 |
| Dog | 2021 | 386 | Shelter RTH | 132 | 0.34 |
Excluding animals coming in from the field, using subtypes ‘Public Drop Off’ and ‘Stray With Finder’. The return rate is fairly similar to that of animals who came from the field.
| Species | Year | OTC_Strays | Shelter_RTH | RTH_Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cat | 2020 | 62 | 2 | 0.03 |
| Cat | 2021 | 145 | 4 | 0.03 |
| Dog | 2020 | 124 | 41 | 0.33 |
| Dog | 2021 | 604 | 184 | 0.30 |
These three time series show the RTH rate per month, to show whether there were times with particularly high or low rates as well as the overall trajectory.
Fairly stable, with a small dip around the beginning of 2021.
This is the same figure, but only counting field strays, and showing only dogs due to cats’ low numbers. The different lines split the rate of return by Field RTH or in-shelter RTH. It seems like the dip in the overall RTH rate comes from this group.
This figure only counts strays who did not come from the field, and the dip is not as apparent.
This section shows the number of stray intakes over time, as well as the breakdown of strays by field/shelter intake.
This could be another useful metrics to reflect the benefits of RTH over other outcome types. It takes into account three components:
As an example, there were 479 stray dos who got RTH in 2021. Assuming 30$ cost of daily care per dog, and given the length-of-stay differences, We can estimate that return-to-homes for dogs saved CAC \(432*30*29=\$375,840\) in 2021 (up to June).
Of course, that is a pretty basic calculation. This can be made more nuanced by differentiating field/shelter returns and incorporating the costs associated with them, if relevant.
Data Note: the length of stay seems higher than average – does this surpise you? In case the averages were high because of a few outliers we looked at the median, but it too is higher than usual.
| Species | Outcome | Count | Average_Length_Of_Stay | Median_Length_Of_Stay |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cat | Other Outcomes | 290 | 40.81 | 25 |
| Cat | RTO | 14 | 1.07 | 1 |
| Dog | Other Outcomes | 719 | 30.66 | 20 |
| Dog | RTO | 517 | 1.49 | 1 |
The following maps show stray intake and RTH rate by Census tracts to highlight geographical patterns. The first and second tab are similar to previous metrics; the third tab, RTH Gap, shows the number of strays who were not returned home per ZIP code.
The data in this section includes stray dogs for which found addresses were present and workable, meaning they had a street number or an intersection (as opposed to just a street name). Animals with the shelter’s address (and anything on its street) were excluded as well. After this filtering, the data below (number of strays, rate of RTH, RTH gap) is shown for 1442 strays of which 362 were RTH, out of a total of 1914 strays in the data we received (from November 2020).
This combines the other two tabs to highlight where most additional RTH potential exists.
This map shows different demogrpahic information for Hamilton County.
Other things we could show if we had the data for it:
Thanks for reading through, and we’re looking forward to talking through it and thinking about more ways to make this data useful for you.